...

[Guest winpro07]

tolerance leads to compassion, and compassion to love.

I desire to be loved by another. It is my pain of separation from the source of love that spurns my need, and deepens my misery. I have always looked in the wrong places. Then she came to me and drew out my sorrow, and forgave me. She is seeking through my eyes for one other who is seeking just the same. This is love! It is the connection we share. The meaning of the moment, and knowing we are one.......

[rain]

Edited June 18, 2008 by rain

[sheng zhen]

I think I like Jed McKenna. Here is a quote I found on the world wide web, I think it is about enlightenment, but it also mentiones love

 

"Here's a simple test. If it's soothing or comforting, if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy; if it's about getting into pleasant emotional or mental states; if it's about peace, love, tranquility, silence or bliss; if it's about a brighter future or a better tomorrow; if it makes you feel good about yourself or boosts your self-esteem, tells you you're okay, tells you everything's just fine the way it is; if it offers to improve, benefit or elevate you, or if it suggests that someone else is better or above you; if it's about belief or faith or worship; if it raises or alters consciousness; if it combats stress or deepens relaxation, or if it's therapeutic or healing, or if it promises happiness or relief from unhappiness, if it's about any of these or similar things, then it's not about waking up. Then it's about living in the dreamstate, not smashing out of it.

On the other hand, if it feels like you're being skinned alive, if it feels like a prolonged evisceration, if you feel your identity unraveling, if it twists you up physically and drains your health and derails your life, if you feel love dying inside you, if it seems like death would be better, then it's probably the process of awakening. That, or a helluva case of gas"

[Guest winpro07]

Jed Mckenna is attacking the main stream new age movement. The truley airy-fairy short cuts to "enlightenment". Quoting him places you in that group. Smashing through is not how it works.

 

Jed is still argueing with his own mind. The source is nothing like he would suggest.

 

This is an excellent thread. Why not use your own words?

 

Rain, very well put

 

The source is a place. It is real, and accessible

 

It is accessible through those we resist, and those who resist us.

 

The path into the heart begins with accepting our ability to feel.

 

No book can teach us how to get there

Edited June 18, 2008 by winpro07

[sheng zhen]

Jed Mckenna is attacking the main stream new age movement. The truley airy-fairy short cuts to "enlightenment". Quoting him places you in that group. Smashing through is not how it works.

 

Jed is still argueing with his own mind. The source is nothing like he would suggest.

 

This is an excellent thread. Why not use your own words?

I did use my own words many times in this thread. Im not really shure who is more into airy-fairy shortcuts to enlightenment of the two of us, winpro... youre doing KUNLUN man!!!

 

I read some more on that site and it discusses if Jed McKenna is not a real person. Very interesting: http://www.spiritualteachers.org/jed_mckenna.htm

[mjjbecker]

..

Edited June 29, 2009 by mjjbecker

[witch]

Not much to add to this thread, sheng zhen! As always, Taomeow said what I think first and better.

 

I think there are two sorts of love--the instinctive love returned to someone who shows us love, and the love that is based on true seeing. While love is blind, I think it's the business of love to find out the truth of the beloved, otherwise the love is for an idea of a person rather than a person.

 

As for some sort of vague generic tapioca pudding concept of Love for humanity with a capital L, I think that's a misnomer. Having compassion on the less fortunate is really less about one's feelings, and more about one's actions. Compassionate feeling is no excuse for letting injustice or poverty or hunger stay in the world without fighting them, and the man who hates humanity but works hard for laws to protect the poor is doing a better deed than the man who is filled with love for mankind while he sits on his behind in the lotus position and does nothing. That is, if you are concerned with virtue. I am a wicked witch, so virtue is not so important to me!

[Patrick Brown]

[三江源]

.

Edited July 18, 2014 by cat

[Ian]

I'm just intrigued about the hinterland between the way we change, when we practise, and the ways we stay the same.

 

Do you remember old shagger Larthe?

 

"if you want to be a different person you have to do different things."

 

I like that one.

[beancurdturtle]

If your practice connects you to a source of unconditional love then the love you manifest to others doesn't have to have some kind of business relationship element to it where it has to be reciprocated.

The kind of relationship love most people express is a commerce based thing. Too many relationships, partners and friends, are based on this.

 

I agree with what you say rex, and a practice is not required to live in a state of unconditional love. It's a side effect of a life of acceptance and contentment. And when you live in this state, the desire to be loved in return disappears - reciprocation is unimportant.

 

Love charges the dynamo, the engine of spiritual evolution. You, the self, devoid of ego...the eternal self, when you choose to Love, charge your dynamo...and therefore evolve. Not all will understand. S'Okay. Women will.

When you are devoid of ego (or no longer a slave to it), you love unconditionally and impartially. You don't choose to love, you just do.

 

It's a very cool place to be, and a little stunning when you first recognize you are there.

 

Peace,

[三江源]

.

Edited July 18, 2014 by cat